2026-01-11 08:20:44

Have you ever thought about a question—what would happen if the world's largest stablecoin suddenly gets classified by the U.S. government as a money laundering tool and all global accounts are frozen?

It sounds like science fiction, but don’t rush to laugh. Just look at what happened to Tornado Cash, and you’ll see that in the face of regulation, even the biggest protocols can be shut down at will. Once this black swan event truly occurs, the U in your centralized exchange account could become a string of numbers that can never be withdrawn. OTC channels will be completely closed, and no matter how much money you hold, you won’t be able to buy a grain of rice.

This is what we call "liquidity zero due to centralized sanctions"—how ironic. We originally came in to escape the shackles of centralization, only to be tightly constrained by centralized stablecoins.

**Extreme scenario? Yes. But prevention is always better than cure.**

My current approach is to significantly increase the proportion of "decentralized stablecoins" in my asset allocation. Compared to products like USD1, I feel more at ease. The logic is simple: it doesn’t belong to any single institution but is backed by over-collateralized on-chain assets (like BNB, ETH). As long as the blockchain network is running and the code hasn’t been compromised, USD1 can always circulate freely and be exchanged on-chain.

By collateralizing my assets to borrow USD1, I am essentially accumulating a form of "unfrozen purchasing power." When others lose sleep over sanctions on U, my USD1 remains a hard currency.

Ultimately, **don’t gamble your life and wealth entirely on others’ conscience**. Use code, smart contracts, and the transparency of blockchain to defend your wealth—that’s true freedom.

USD10,01%

BNB0,28%

ETH0,68%

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

14 Likes

Reward
14
7
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

AirdropHunter9000

· 01-13 22:50

Speaking of which, the Tornado Cash incident indeed scared quite a few people. I'm now gradually converting my U into decentralized stablecoins, and I feel much more at ease. Really, putting all your eggs in one basket is too risky. The policy direction in the crypto world is unpredictable. As for over-collateralized assets like USD1, at least no one can directly freeze your funds, I believe in that. I'm slowly withdrawing my U from centralized exchanges. No matter how high the interest, it's not worth it. Going to zero overnight is too terrifying. Escaping centralized exchanges still results in being stuck by centralized control. The plot twist is quite ironic, haha. It's really hard to guard against everything, but at least using smart contracts is better than trusting people.

View OriginalReply0

P2ENotWorking

· 01-13 18:37

Really, the Tornado Cash incident scared me. I truly don't dare to keep too much U on exchanges anymore. If U gets frozen one day, it's all over. I'm now also stocking some decentralized stablecoins, which seem to be the only way out. It's 2024, and still playing with centralized stablecoins is really a gamble on luck. Better to directly use on-chain assets for collateralization and generation. By the way, do you really believe that USD1 can withstand sanctions? It still feels a bit uncertain. The worst thing is if one day the US issues an announcement, and you can't move anything in your hands. That's the real nightmare. Instead of waiting for a black swan, it's better to diversify your eggs into different baskets now.

View OriginalReply0

TokenVelocity

· 01-13 10:47

Really, the Tornado Cash incident scared me quite a bit, and I suddenly saw the risks of U clearly. --- Instead of waiting for a black swan, it's better to cut to decentralized stablecoins now; that's the awareness players should have. --- The two sides of a coin—originally meant to escape centralization—ended up being tied down by U. --- I'm also trying the idea of collateralizing to borrow USD1; it's definitely better than leaving our fate to regulators. --- That's a valid point, but it depends on who can truly make decentralized stablecoins stable and reliable. --- Code doesn't lie, I believe that. Anyway, I no longer trust any institutions. --- This extreme hypothetical isn't really extreme at all; there have been many cases of frozen accounts in history. --- I just want to know what happens if the collateral for USD1 is also frozen—can the chain still be bypassed?

View OriginalReply0

CryptoMotivator

· 01-11 08:50

Really? The day U was frozen, I had already run away. Now it's all decentralized stablecoins.

View OriginalReply0

MrRightClick

· 01-11 08:48

Damn, this logic is indeed brilliant. Centralized stablecoins are just an invisible bomb. --- The lesson from Tornado Cash is right here; no matter how big the project is, it can't withstand a simple ban. --- I just want to know how many people will regret not allocating some funds to decentralized stablecoins when this happens. --- Code is the most solid guarantee; it can't be arbitrarily frozen by any department. --- Basically, it's about taking back your keys and not trusting exchanges to hold your assets. --- Things like USD1, which are collateralized on-chain, are truly satisfying; no one can hold a gun to your head. --- Preventive measures are never wrong; they may seem unnecessary now, but it’s too late once something happens. --- What left the deepest impression on me was that feeling of despair—no money can buy rice. --- The core question is: who do you trust? The Federal Reserve or the code? --- Collateralized borrowing to build "frozen-proof purchasing power"—I never thought about it from this angle.

View OriginalReply0

BearMarketHustler

· 01-11 08:42

Hmm... The Tornado Cash incident has really been contained. Those still messing around with centralized U should wake up now. --- Decentralized stablecoins sound good, but you need to understand the risks of these protocols yourself, and avoid falling into new traps. --- So we struggled to escape the cage of CeFi, only to be finally trapped by the stablecoin chain? That's so ironic haha. --- I need to research the over-collateralization of USD1, but I can't go all-in either; diversification is still necessary. --- It sounds like you're advising me to convert all U into on-chain assets, but it's not that simple, right? --- Preventive measures are correct, but when that day comes, decentralized stablecoins will also rely on technology to avoid issues. --- So essentially, it's a bet on the survival of blockchain, just shifting the risk from institutions to code? --- I just want to ask how people holding large amounts of U sleep at night—are they really not worried? --- I understand this logic, but I don't know if we have truly reliable decentralized stablecoin options.

View OriginalReply0

AirdropChaser

· 01-11 08:36

Damn, I have to admit this logic is flawless, U really is like a time bomb. Speaking of which, decentralized stablecoins sound reliable, but can the over-collateralized tokens really withstand a sharp drop in the coin price? This analysis can't hold up anymore; it seems most people haven't fully realized this risk. Instead of hoarding U, it's better to diversify. Forms like USD1 do allow for a more peaceful sleep. Honestly, the Tornado incident was indeed frightening, and it seems there will be more and more policy pressures like this in the future.

View OriginalReply0